Manual Scoring: Rework Scoring by Question

1 Initial Problem

The current implementation of the Subtab "Scoring by Question" does not focus on the answers given by the test participants. It provides a good overview once test participants have been scored, but the actual process becomes tedious quickly, because the user has to open each answer given seperately by clicking on "Show answer".

This becomes a real issue when working on corrections for hundreds of test participants, which is quite common for larger institutions.

2 Conceptual Summary

To solve the issue we propose the following:

• the tab is split into 2 tabs:
  • Scoring Overview: This tab keeps the focus on a table to quickly see scores that have been entered by the teacher. Answers to a question can be displayed by clicking on "Show answer"
  • Scoring by Question: This tab replaces the current implementation and focuses heavily on the answers given to a question over all participants (much like the tab "Scoring by Participants" focuses on the participant). The goal is to provide the user (i.e. the teacher) with a GUI that enables them to correct all answers for a given question. The answer entered needs to be displayed on the same page as the form inputs for points and it needs to be visible at all times.

3 User Interface Modifications

3.1 List of Affected Views

• tst/manscoring/man_scoring_by_qst

3.2 User Interface Details

The rework should contain:

• filter for question and test pass
• element to set the number of answers shown on one page (min: 1, max: 10)

Scoring by Question (1-10) no manual feedback, no question text

Scoring by Question plus manual feedback

3.3 New User Interface Concepts

No new user interface concepts.

4 Technical Information

{The maintainer has to provide necessary technical information, e.g. dependencies on other ILIAS components, necessary modifications in general services/architecture, potential security or performance issues.}

5 Privacy Information

• Username and full name of user account (optional). This might be omitted in order to enable "anonymous" manual scoring, but it might be needed for some use cases. It is beyond the scope of this request to implement a "anonymous manual scoring" mode for the test player.

6 Contact

• Author of the Request: Sesterhenn, Fabian [sesterhenn]
  
• Maintainer: {Please add your name before applying for an initial workshop or a Jour Fixe meeting.}
• Implementation of the feature is done by: {The maintainer must add the name of the implementing developer.}

7 Funding

If you are interest in funding this feature, please add your name and institution to this list.

• TH Köln

8 Discussion

Sesterhenn, Fabian [sesterhenn], 30.03.2022: As of now this request has been solved with a plugin: Manual_Scoring_Question Plugin. TH Köln is open to feature requests for the plugin (funding is very welcome too!). We might consider and work on a trunk integration in the future if the plugin is well received by the community.

Strassner, Denis [dstrassner], 27.01.2020: Hello, this feature was not discussed in the SIG EA and was not included in the roadmap at the meeting in Marburg (13.11.2019).
Please bring the feature into the discussion process of the SIG EA first.
Furthermore: Have you already looked at the changes in ILIAS 6 for manual scoring?

Sesterhenn, Fabian [sesterhenn], 30.01.2020: Hi Denis, sorry, I was not aware that feature requests for the test had to go through the SIG always. Is that so? I talked to Björn on the phone about this FR and agreed to put it on the JF agenda. We will bring this FR to the SIG now though, plus a couple of additional ones. I tried to find the roadmap of the SIG EA, but wasn't able to quickly. Would you mind putting it at the very forefront of the group page? Or maybe it's pinned somewhere else I do not know about?

Changes in ILIAS 6 don't cover our requirements.

Strassner, Denis [dstrassner], 30.01.2020: 
Björn, Martin (as Maintainer ASQ) and Matthias (PM) agreed to this procedure in Marburg. I am therefore surprised that Björn did not remember it during the telephone conversation.
Should I put the Feature Request on the agenda for the SIG EA Meeting in Berlin on March 25, 20?

Sorry, the roadmap data collection was offline: LINK

9 Implementation

{The maintainer has to give a description of the final implementation and add screenshots if possible.}

Test Cases

Test cases completed at {date} by {user}

• {Test case number linked to Testrail} : {test case title}

Approval

Approved at {date} by {user}.